Teaching Lifestyle Medicine Well: Why Educator Capability Matters in Viet Nam
LIFESTYLE MEDICINE IN VIET NAMRESEARCH & IMPLEMENTATION
Teaching Lifestyle Medicine Well: Why Educator Capability Matters in Viet Nam
Primary category: Lifestyle Medicine in Viet Nam
Secondary category: Research & Implementation
Article type: VLMA Perspective
Last reviewed: October 22, 2026
A healthcare professional can have considerable expertise in Lifestyle Medicine and still find teaching it difficult.
Understanding scientific evidence is one skill. Helping other professionals understand that evidence, question its limitations, and connect what they learn with their own responsibilities requires additional capabilities.
An experienced clinician may deliver a presentation containing accurate research findings, yet participants may leave uncertain about which conclusions are well supported, how to interpret conflicting studies, or what the information means for their professional work. Another educator may cover less material but create opportunities for learners to examine the evidence, explain their reasoning, recognize uncertainty, and identify what they still need to understand.
The difference may not lie in the educator's knowledge of Lifestyle Medicine. It may be how that knowledge is communicated and how the learning experience is organized.
As the Vietnam Lifestyle Medicine Alliance (VLMA) develops its professional education activities, we believe this distinction deserves attention. Our purpose is to support the responsible development of evidence-based Lifestyle Medicine in Viet Nam, but the number of lectures, invited speakers, or participants should not be the only measure of educational progress.
Teaching quality matters because it shapes how healthcare professionals engage with scientific information, examine professional questions, and understand the limits of what they have learned.
This article focuses on educator capability: the knowledge, skills, judgment, and professional conduct involved in helping healthcare professionals learn effectively and responsibly.
It does not revisit the Lifestyle Medicine curriculum, propose new clinical competencies, or define additional levels of professional training. Instead, we consider what good teaching requires, what international research tells us about developing healthcare educators, and how these principles could inform VLMA's future educational activities.
This is an organizational perspective. It does not imply that VLMA has already established a formal faculty development program, an educator certification system, or an accredited teaching program.
Clinical Expertise Does Not Automatically Make Someone an Effective Educator
Clinical expertise provides an important foundation for teaching healthcare professionals. Someone familiar with scientific research, professional guidance, and the realities of healthcare delivery can offer insights that may be difficult to obtain from textbooks alone.
However, expertise does not automatically translate into effective teaching.
An educator also needs to understand the intended audience, the purpose of the activity, the knowledge participants already have, and the difficulties they may encounter.
A presentation appropriate for experienced physicians may be too specialized for students or professionals from other disciplines. Conversely, a general introduction may offer limited value to participants who already understand the subject and want to examine more complex questions.
An effective educator recognizes these differences and adjusts the learning experience accordingly.
This is particularly relevant to Lifestyle Medicine because the field draws on research and professional knowledge from clinical medicine, nutrition, physical activity, behavioral science, psychology, public health, and other disciplines. No single professional necessarily has comprehensive expertise across every subject.
An appropriately qualified nutrition professional may contribute specialized nutritional knowledge. A rehabilitation professional may offer expertise related to movement and physical function. A physician may address clinical considerations within the physician's professional responsibilities.
These contributions can all be valuable when the educator's qualifications and experience match the subject being taught.
Teaching across disciplines, however, requires recognition of professional boundaries. Educators should know when a question extends beyond their expertise and when additional evidence or input from another appropriately qualified professional is needed.
Acknowledging uncertainty is part of responsible professional teaching. It allows educators to demonstrate that scientific knowledge has limits and that professional judgment includes recognizing those limits.
For VLMA, selecting knowledgeable contributors is an important starting point, but teaching also requires educational judgment, communication skills, and respect for the boundaries of professional expertise.
What International Evidence Tells Us About Educator Development
The development of healthcare educators has become an established area of research.
Internationally, the term faculty development is commonly used to describe activities that help health professionals strengthen their roles as teachers, supervisors, educational leaders, and contributors to educational scholarship.
Despite the word faculty, these activities are not necessarily limited to university professors. Depending on the setting, they may involve clinicians who teach colleagues, professionals who facilitate workshops, supervisors supporting workplace learning, and educators involved in structured professional training.
A scoping review by Van Schalkwyk and colleagues, published in Medical Teacher in 2025, examined 418 papers published between 2015 and 2023.
The review found considerable variation in how faculty development was understood and organized. Activities included workshops, courses, longer-term development programs, coaching, and mentoring. Many publications focused on teaching, learning, and assessment, while others examined collaboration, professional relationships, and organizational learning.
An earlier systematic review by Steinert and colleagues, published in 2016, examined 111 studies of faculty development initiatives designed to improve teaching effectiveness.
The authors identified potentially useful features, including relevant educational content, experiential learning, opportunities for feedback and reflection, longer-term development, and institutional support.
Improvements were reported in several educator-related outcomes, including knowledge, confidence, teaching practices, and selected observed behaviors. However, organizational outcomes were examined less frequently, and important limitations remained in evaluating longer-term effects.
More recent research has provided additional insight into the conditions that influence participation in educator development.
A scoping review by Green and colleagues, published online in July 2026, examined 56 articles about clinician educators' participation in faculty development across academic and community-based settings.
The authors identified interacting personal and environmental influences, including motivation, professional identity, access to opportunities, program structure, workplace relationships, incentives, and organizational culture.
These findings highlight an important distinction. Educator development depends not only on someone's willingness to learn, but also on whether the working environment provides realistic opportunities and support for that learning.
The studies offer useful guidance, but their conclusions should not be overstated. They do not establish that a particular workshop, mentoring arrangement, or faculty development program will produce the same results in every educational setting.
Improvements in educators' confidence or teaching practices also do not automatically demonstrate better clinical care or patient outcomes.
For VLMA, the evidence supports giving educator capability greater attention while remaining realistic about what development activities can achieve and what their outcomes can demonstrate.
Choosing Teaching Methods That Fit the Learning Need
Good educators do not use the same teaching method for every subject.
The choice should depend on what participants need to understand, examine, or demonstrate.
A concise presentation may be appropriate when the objective is to introduce an unfamiliar concept, explain research findings, or clarify important terminology. A guided discussion may be more useful when learners need to compare interpretations, examine uncertainty, or consider why evidence from one setting may not apply directly to another.
Where the intended outcome involves a particular practical skill, demonstration, supervised practice, and appropriate feedback may be needed. Such activities must be organized by suitably qualified educators and within the applicable professional and institutional requirements.
Sometimes a combination of methods is appropriate.
The important question is not whether an activity appears innovative or interactive. It is whether the chosen approach serves the learning objective.
A lecture is not necessarily ineffective because it contains limited interaction. Likewise, a workshop is not automatically effective because participants are divided into groups or invited to answer questions.
An interactive session may generate considerable discussion without helping learners understand the central scientific issue. An educator therefore needs to consider how the activity will support understanding, reveal misunderstandings, and give participants appropriate opportunities to engage with the material.
The World Health Organization's Global Competency and Outcomes Framework for Universal Health Coverage, published in 2022, provides useful guidance on aligning educational outcomes, learning activities, and assessment.
The framework is relevant to both pre-service and in-service competency-based health workforce education, although it is not a Lifestyle Medicine-specific teaching standard.
Its emphasis on connecting educational methods with intended outcomes offers a useful principle for professional learning.
For VLMA, the method should follow the educational need, not the other way around. The goal is not to make every session more complicated or interactive, but to encourage teaching approaches that are appropriate for the subject, audience, and intended learning outcome.
Creating a Learning Environment Where People Can Ask Questions
Healthcare professionals do not always feel comfortable admitting what they do not know.
A junior participant may hesitate to question an experienced physician. Someone from another profession may worry that their contribution will be dismissed. Others may be reluctant to acknowledge that they are unfamiliar with a scientific method, clinical term, or international recommendation.
These concerns can influence how people participate in educational activities.
An effective educator should help create an environment where learners can ask questions, express uncertainty, and respectfully challenge an interpretation without unnecessary embarrassment.
This does not mean that every contribution must be accepted as scientifically correct. It means that participants should be able to examine ideas without being personally criticized for asking reasonable questions or making honest mistakes.
Educators can encourage participation by explaining the purpose of a discussion, inviting different perspectives, allowing time for reflection, and responding constructively when an answer is incomplete.
Professional hierarchies also deserve attention.
In some educational settings, participants may be accustomed to listening to a senior expert rather than questioning the material presented. Professional experience deserves respect, but scientific claims should remain open to appropriate examination.
A senior participant's opinion should not automatically settle a question when the available research supports a different interpretation. Similarly, an educator should not use professional authority to discourage legitimate questions about the strength or limitations of evidence.
Language can create another barrier.
International Lifestyle Medicine publications are frequently available in English, while participants in Viet Nam may have different levels of familiarity with English medical terminology. Someone may understand a clinical concept but struggle to participate when the discussion relies heavily on unfamiliar expressions.
Where appropriate, educators can clarify terminology, explain important concepts in Vietnamese, or use examples suited to the intended audience.
The aim is not to remove scientific complexity. It is to make that complexity understandable enough for meaningful professional learning.
A productive learning environment should support both openness and scientific accountability. Participants should feel able to contribute while recognizing that professional opinions must still be examined against credible evidence.
Managing Professional Disagreement Responsibly
Disagreement is a normal part of scientific discussion.
Healthcare professionals may interpret research differently, have experience with different patient populations, or approach the same question from different professional perspectives.
These differences can make an educational discussion more valuable. They can also create difficulties when strongly held opinions are presented as established scientific conclusions.
In Lifestyle Medicine, subjects such as dietary approaches, physical activity, behavior change, weight management, supplements, and emerging interventions may attract confident claims that vary considerably in their scientific support.
Educators should be prepared to address these differences without allowing personal preferences to determine the conclusions.
Consider a discussion in which a participant argues that an intervention has been proven effective for everyone because one published study reported favorable results.
Simply agreeing would risk overstating the evidence. Dismissing the participant without explanation would also miss an opportunity for learning.
A more useful response would be to examine what the study investigated, who participated, which outcomes were measured, how certain the findings were, and whether the proposed conclusion extends beyond what the research supports.
The educator does not need to resolve every scientific controversy during a single session. However, they should help participants distinguish established findings from preliminary evidence, reasonable interpretation, and unsupported claims.
Where authoritative clinical recommendations exist, they should be represented accurately, including relevant limitations. Where evidence is incomplete or conflicting, uncertainty should be acknowledged rather than concealed behind a preferred opinion.
Respectful disagreement does not require treating every claim as equally credible. It requires using consistent standards to evaluate evidence, including when those standards challenge the educator's own assumptions.
An educator should also recognize when a discussion moves away from its learning objective or begins to encourage patient-specific recommendations outside the purpose of the activity. Returning to the educational question may then be necessary.
For VLMA, responsible teaching should help healthcare professionals become more confident in examining evidence, not simply more confident in repeating conclusions.
Giving Feedback That Helps Learners Improve
Feedback is one of the most important responsibilities of an educator.
It is also easy to provide feedback that sounds encouraging without giving learners much practical guidance.
Telling someone that an answer was good may acknowledge their contribution, but it does not explain what they did well. Similarly, telling a participant that an interpretation was incorrect may not help them understand which part of their reasoning needs to change.
Useful feedback should relate to a clear learning objective and help the learner understand both their current performance and a possible next step.
For example, during a discussion about research findings, an educator may recognize that a participant correctly identified an important result but overlooked a limitation affecting its interpretation.
The feedback can acknowledge the accurate observation, explain the missing consideration, and encourage the learner to reconsider the relevant evidence.
This is more useful than simply labeling an answer correct or incorrect.
Feedback should also be constructive and forward-looking. The learner may need to know which question to reconsider, what information to examine, or how to approach a similar problem more carefully next time.
This forward-looking aspect is often described as feedforward in educational literature.
A scoping review by Vögelin and colleagues, published in PLOS ONE in July 2026, examined feedback and feedforward methods in medical and higher health professions education.
The review included 14 studies, all involving medical students, with one study also including a subgroup of psychiatry residents.
It identified approaches such as expert feedback, peer feedback, self-assessment, video-based feedback, and future-oriented guidance. Expert and video-based approaches were associated with performance improvements in the included studies, while findings for self- and peer feedback were more variable.
The authors also found that feedforward was often incorporated into feedback practices without being clearly identified or described as a separate method.
These findings should be interpreted within their scope. They do not establish that one method is best for every healthcare profession, educator, or educational setting.
For VLMA, the practical lesson is that feedback should be respectful, specific, connected to the learning objective, and useful for further improvement.
Educators should also be willing to receive feedback themselves.
If participants repeatedly find an explanation confusing or a session difficult to follow, that may reveal an opportunity to improve the teaching.
Learning is not only a responsibility of the participant. Good educators continue to examine their own work.
Teaching Scientific Evidence With Professional Integrity
Educators influence not only what participants learn, but also how they understand the credibility of scientific information.
A presentation may include references to published studies while still create a misleading impression. This can happen when favorable findings are emphasized selectively, important limitations are omitted, or uncertain conclusions are presented with excessive confidence.
The presence of citations does not, by itself, make teaching evidence-based.
Responsible educators should consider the quality, relevance, and currency of the sources they use. They should distinguish well-established recommendations from emerging findings that still require further evaluation.
They should also recognize when studies address different questions.
For example, evidence that a particular health behavior is associated with better outcomes is not necessarily the same as evidence that a specific counseling intervention reliably changes that behavior.
Similarly, evidence that an intervention produces benefits in selected research participants does not automatically establish comparable effectiveness in every healthcare setting.
These distinctions help learners understand what the scientific literature can reasonably support.
Lifestyle Medicine education should also avoid presenting lifestyle-related interventions as universal replacements for established medical treatment.
Evidence-based lifestyle interventions can play important roles in prevention and disease management. In selected circumstances, appropriately supported interventions may contribute to remission of certain conditions.
However, the relevance, safety, and appropriateness of any intervention depend on the clinical situation, the supporting evidence, and professional assessment.
Educational materials should communicate these boundaries accurately.
Scientific integrity also requires attention to conflicts of interest.
Commercial sponsorship, financial relationships, professional affiliations, and commitments to particular approaches may influence which topics are emphasized or how evidence is presented.
Relevant interests should be disclosed appropriately, and educational decisions should remain independent of commercial promotion.
A sponsor should not determine the scientific conclusions of an educational session simply because it provides financial support.
Likewise, inviting a prominent speaker should not automatically be treated as proof that every statement in the presentation has been independently verified.
Educational organizations need to distinguish the professional credentials of contributors from their own responsibility to maintain appropriate standards for educational content.
For VLMA, trust in professional education should be built through consistent attention to evidence, transparency, and accountability.
Making Teaching Relevant to Vietnamese Healthcare
International educational frameworks provide valuable guidance, but effective teaching must also consider the circumstances of the intended learners.
Healthcare professionals in Viet Nam work in different environments, including public and private hospitals, outpatient clinics, primary care services, universities, and other healthcare organizations.
Their responsibilities, professional experience, educational opportunities, and access to resources may differ considerably.
A teaching session designed for experienced hospital specialists may not be equally suitable for healthcare professionals working in primary care or for a multidisciplinary group.
International presentations may also use examples based on healthcare arrangements that are less familiar to participants in Viet Nam.
In such circumstances, the educator's task is not simply to translate the slides into Vietnamese. It is to consider whether the examples, terminology, and explanations are appropriate for the audience while preserving the scientific meaning of the material.
This may involve explaining the setting in which a study was conducted, clarifying unfamiliar terminology, or acknowledging differences in healthcare service availability.
These are educational adjustments intended to improve understanding. They should not be confused with formally adapting clinical practice guidelines or establishing locally authorized treatment recommendations.
Educators should also consider the demands of healthcare work.
Participants may have clinical schedules, professional responsibilities, or limited opportunities for extended study. A learning activity requiring substantial preparation or prolonged attendance may therefore be difficult to accommodate.
This does not mean reducing educational standards.
It means choosing a format that fits the educational purpose, setting realistic expectations, and making appropriate use of the time available.
A focused session addressing one important question may offer greater educational value than a lengthy presentation covering many topics without sufficient explanation. However, the effectiveness of either format should be evaluated rather than assumed.
For VLMA, local relevance should be considered part of educational quality from the beginning, not something added after the presentation has already been prepared.
Evaluating Learning Without Confusing Attendance With Competence
Good educators consider how they will know whether learning has occurred.
The answer depends on what the activity was intended to achieve.
If the objective is to improve understanding of a research topic, participants may be asked to explain its principal findings and recognize relevant limitations.
If the objective involves critical appraisal, learners may need to distinguish supported interpretations from unsupported claims.
If professional communication is the focus, a suitable learning activity may include opportunities to explain information and receive constructive feedback.
These approaches assess different aspects of learning.
A short knowledge test may provide useful information about understanding, but it cannot establish comprehensive clinical competence.
An observed discussion may reveal elements of professional reasoning without demonstrating how someone performs during actual patient care.
Similarly, satisfaction surveys can provide valuable feedback about the learning experience, but they do not establish that knowledge, skills, or professional behavior have improved.
Assessment should therefore be proportionate to the activity.
Participants should understand what is being evaluated, why it matters, and how the results will be interpreted.
Educators should also consider fairness. Questions should be clear, relevant to the learning objective, and appropriate for participants' backgrounds.
Where formal assessment is used, the methods and criteria need to be suitable for the decisions being made and supported by appropriate quality safeguards. An assessment developed for one group of learners should not automatically be assumed to be suitable for another.
The distinction between educational and clinical outcomes is particularly important.
Improved knowledge or performance during a workshop does not, by itself, demonstrate changes in actual clinical practice.
Even where an activity produces measurable educational improvements, additional evidence would be needed to establish whether those changes affect clinical behavior, quality of care, or patient outcomes.
For VLMA, a responsible approach would begin with clearly defined and achievable learning objectives. The purpose of assessment should be to understand what participants learned and identify opportunities for improvement, not simply to produce favorable scores or completion statistics.
Developing Educators Is an Ongoing Process
Educator capability is not established once and maintained automatically.
Scientific knowledge changes. Educational research develops. Learners' needs differ, and an educator who is effective in one setting may need to adjust their approach in another.
Professional growth therefore requires opportunities to reflect on teaching, receive feedback, learn from colleagues, and reconsider established methods.
The international faculty development literature describes several approaches.
Workshops and short courses may introduce new educational concepts. Mentoring, coaching, peer observation, and longer-term development activities may provide opportunities to apply those concepts and examine actual teaching experiences.
Informal discussions with experienced colleagues can also contribute to professional learning.
However, participation alone does not guarantee improvement.
The quality of the activity, opportunities to apply what has been learned, and the support available afterward all matter.
An educator who attends a workshop but has no opportunity to use the methods or receive feedback may find it difficult to change established teaching practices.
Conversely, a professional who receives constructive feedback on a specific teaching activity may identify a practical improvement worth making.
The 2025 review by Van Schalkwyk and colleagues highlights both the individual and organizational dimensions of faculty development. The 2026 review by Green and colleagues further demonstrates that participation is influenced by the interaction of personal motivation, workplace culture, access, and organizational support.
These findings suggest that developing educators should be understood as a continuing process rather than a single qualification or event.
For VLMA, selecting knowledgeable contributors is an important starting point. As educational activities develop, considering how those contributors can be supported in teaching effectively may also become valuable.
Educational Quality Is Also an Organizational Responsibility
Teaching quality should not depend entirely on individual educators.
An organization influences the learning experience through the way it selects contributors, defines expectations, provides preparation, manages resources, and responds to feedback.
Even an experienced educator may struggle when the intended learning objectives are unclear, the assigned topic is too broad, or the time available is unrealistic.
A session may also be weakened when the educator receives little information about participants' backgrounds or educational needs.
Educational quality therefore begins before the teaching activity takes place.
The organization should have a clear understanding of the intended audience, the purpose of the session, the responsibilities of contributors, and the limitations of what the activity can reasonably achieve.
Where appropriate, this may involve discussing learning objectives in advance, reviewing educational materials, clarifying professional boundaries, and identifying potentially contested scientific claims.
Relevant conflicts of interest should be managed transparently.
Feedback after the activity should help identify improvements rather than simply serve as evidence of participant satisfaction.
When several institutions or professional disciplines are involved, responsibilities for educational content, delivery, assessment, documentation, and any formal recognition should be clearly understood.
International professional standards offer useful guidance.
The Academy of Medical Educators in the United Kingdom published the fourth edition of its Professional Standards in 2021.
These standards address educational design, teaching and facilitating learning, assessment, educational scholarship, and educational management and leadership. They also emphasize professional responsibility, reflection, educational governance, and respect for learners and colleagues.
The standards are not mandatory requirements for VLMA or Vietnamese healthcare educators. Nevertheless, they illustrate why educator capability involves much more than subject knowledge and presentation skills.
For an organization seeking to support professional learning, providing appropriate conditions for good teaching is part of the responsibility for educational quality.
Educator Requirements and Professional Boundaries in Viet Nam
International educational standards must be considered alongside Vietnamese law.
A public educational article, an informal professional discussion, a structured training course, and supervised clinical teaching are not necessarily subject to identical requirements.
Their legal and institutional obligations depend on the nature of the activity, its provider, its intended participants, and the applicable regulatory framework.
The Law on Medical Examination and Treatment No. 15/2023/QH15, as amended, establishes professional requirements for medical examination and treatment activities.
Participation in an educational activity does not independently confer clinical authority or expand a healthcare professional's lawful scope of practice.
The Ministry of Health has also established requirements concerning continuing training and continuing medical knowledge updating for healthcare personnel.
On August 10, 2026, the Ministry issued Decision No. 2546/QD-BYT, establishing quality assurance standards for continuing training and continuing medical knowledge updating.
The standards address organizational responsibilities, educational programs, learning materials, educator qualifications and experience, assessment, and quality assurance.
They also include requirements concerning the periodic development of educators' professional knowledge and medical teaching methods within the training settings covered by the standards.
For instructors involved in applicable clinical practical training, professional licensing and clinical teaching methodology requirements are particularly important.
Circular No. 11/2019/TT-BYT regulates training in clinical teaching and learning methods for instructors involved in practical training in health professions education.
These requirements should not be assumed to apply identically to every informal academic discussion, professional lecture, or publicly available educational resource.
Equally, they must not be overlooked when an activity falls within a regulated form of education or clinical training.
The applicable obligations should be determined according to the actual nature of the activity, the responsible organization, and the relevant legal requirements.
For VLMA, this distinction is essential.
As a physician-led professional platform operated by Vietnam Lifestyle Medicine Alliance Company Limited, VLMA aims to contribute to professional education within its lawful organizational scope and any applicable institutional arrangements.
However, organizing a professional learning activity does not automatically make that activity a formally recognized continuing medical education program.
An invited educator's professional qualifications also do not, by themselves, authorize the issuance of recognized continuing medical education credits or professional certifications.
Where VLMA collaborates with a university, hospital, or other eligible organization, responsibilities concerning educational delivery, assessment, documentation, and any formal recognition should be agreed upon clearly.
Certificates of Attendance or Completion, where appropriately issued, should accurately describe what participants have attended or completed.
They should not be presented as medical practice licenses, specialty qualifications, educator certifications, International Board of Lifestyle Medicine certifications, or formally recognized continuing education credits unless the relevant conditions for that recognition have been satisfied.
Professional credibility requires clarity about both the value and the limits of an educational activity.
How VLMA Aims to Support Better Teaching
VLMA is developing its professional education platform with the aim of connecting scientific evidence with learning that is relevant to healthcare practice in Viet Nam.
We do not claim to operate a formal educator development academy, an accredited faculty development curriculum, or an independent educator certification system.
Nevertheless, educator capability can inform how we approach future educational activities.
An achievable starting point would be to establish clear expectations for individuals contributing to VLMA learning activities.
These expectations could include appropriate subject expertise, understanding of the intended audience, use of credible scientific sources, recognition of professional boundaries, and willingness to engage constructively with questions.
For activities involving discussion or facilitated learning, attention could also be given to how educators encourage participation, address different interpretations, and provide feedback.
Where feasible, educational contributors could receive information about the purpose of a session and its intended learning outcomes before preparing their materials.
Selected activities might benefit from peer discussion or review of educational content, particularly when topics involve uncertain evidence, professional safety considerations, or potentially contested claims.
Participant feedback could help identify where explanations were unclear, whether the learning objectives were addressed, and what might be improved.
Over time, mentoring, peer observation, co-facilitation, or other forms of educator development may become appropriate.
These possibilities should be considered in relation to VLMA's actual expertise, available resources, and institutional partnerships. They should not be presented as established programs until they have been developed and implemented.
VLMA does not need to present itself as a university or medical training institution to make a responsible contribution to professional learning.
Its potential value lies in connecting healthcare professionals, educators, researchers, and organizations around reliable scientific information and the challenges involved in communicating that information well.
Such collaboration can support professional learning when responsibilities are clear, contributions are appropriately qualified, and educational activities are organized responsibly.
At this stage, building credibility through manageable and well-prepared activities is more important than promising a comprehensive training infrastructure.
The emphasis should remain on educational quality, scientific integrity, and realistic expectations.
Teaching Lifestyle Medicine Well: Our Commitment
The development of Lifestyle Medicine education in Viet Nam will require more than making scientific publications available or organizing additional educational events.
It also requires people who can help healthcare professionals understand, question, and interpret the evidence responsibly.
A knowledgeable speaker can make a valuable contribution, but good teaching involves more than delivering accurate information.
It requires educational judgment, appropriate methods, constructive communication, respect for different learners, and the ability to recognize uncertainty and professional boundaries.
For VLMA, educator capability should be part of the wider effort to strengthen professional capacity in evidence-based Lifestyle Medicine.
We do not believe that educational progress should be measured only by the number of speakers invited, lectures delivered, participants registered, or certificates issued.
Those measures can describe activity. They do not, by themselves, demonstrate the quality of learning.
Our intention is to encourage educational practices that help healthcare professionals engage critically with scientific evidence, ask meaningful questions, learn from different disciplines, and remain accountable to their professional responsibilities.
We recognize that such work requires suitable contributors, thoughtful preparation, organizational support, and a willingness to improve through feedback and experience.
VLMA is not seeking to replace universities, established healthcare training institutions, or the regulatory systems governing professional education in Viet Nam.
We hope to contribute by helping connect credible expertise with learning experiences that are relevant to Vietnamese healthcare.
Teaching Lifestyle Medicine well is not only about knowing what the evidence says. It is about helping others understand what the evidence means, what it does not establish, and how that knowledge can be used responsibly within their professional roles.
For VLMA, giving educator capability greater attention is one meaningful way to support the journey from scientific evidence toward stronger professional learning and better-informed Lifestyle Medicine practice in Viet Nam.
Selected References
Vietnam Lifestyle Medicine Alliance. Lifestyle Medicine Education and Professional Development. VLMA; 2026.
Van Schalkwyk S, Amaral E, Anakin M, et al. Disentangling faculty development: A scoping review towards a rich description of the concept and its practice. Medical Teacher. 2025;47(8):1304–1325. doi:10.1080/0142159X.2024.2429612.
Green E, O'Brien B, Kluijtmans M, Chen HC. Clinician educators' participation in faculty development: A scoping review of academic and community-based settings. Medical Teacher. Published online July 30, 2026. doi:10.1080/0142159X.2026.2708965.
Steinert Y, Mann K, Anderson B, et al. A systematic review of faculty development initiatives designed to enhance teaching effectiveness: A 10-year update: BEME Guide No. 40. Medical Teacher. 2016;38(8):769–786. doi:10.1080/0142159X.2016.1181851.
Vögelin J, Koenig I, Sterkele I, Himmelsbach T, Blasimann A, Zinzen E, Rogan S. Feedback and feedforward methods in medical and higher health education: A scoping review. PLOS ONE. 2026;21(7). doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0354742.
Academy of Medical Educators. Professional Standards. 4th ed. Cardiff, United Kingdom: Academy of Medical Educators; 2021.
World Health Organization. Global Competency and Outcomes Framework for Universal Health Coverage. Geneva: World Health Organization; 2022. ISBN: 978-92-4-003466-2.
National Assembly of Viet Nam. Law on Medical Examination and Treatment No. 15/2023/QH15, as amended. Consolidated Text No. 26/VBHN-VPQH, February 26, 2026.
Ministry of Health of Viet Nam. Decision No. 2546/QD-BYT Issuing the Quality Assurance Standards for Continuing Training and Continuing Medical Knowledge Updating for Healthcare Personnel. August 10, 2026.
Ministry of Health of Viet Nam. Circular No. 11/2019/TT-BYT on Training in Clinical Teaching and Learning Methods for Practical Instructors in Health Professions Education. June 17, 2019.
Editorial and Professional Scope Note
This article presents the organizational perspective and intended educational direction of the Vietnam Lifestyle Medicine Alliance as of October 2026. It is intended for professional information, education, and knowledge exchange. It does not constitute an official curriculum, educator competency standard, teaching qualification, clinical practice guideline, formal assessment framework, or regulatory interpretation.
References to educator development, mentoring, peer learning, teaching review, feedback, and other educational approaches describe general principles and possible future directions unless explicitly identified as established VLMA activities. The article does not imply that VLMA operates an accredited faculty development program, independently certifies healthcare educators, or has demonstrated improvements in clinical practice or patient outcomes through its educational work.
VLMA is a physician-led professional platform operated by Vietnam Lifestyle Medicine Alliance Company Limited. It is not a healthcare service provider, medical licensing authority, or independent issuer of International Board of Lifestyle Medicine certification. Participation in its educational activities does not independently confer a professional qualification, expand lawful scope of practice, or provide formally recognized continuing medical education credits.
Any future formal training, clinical teaching, assessment, certification, or institutional education activity must comply with applicable Vietnamese legal, professional, educational, and institutional requirements.
Vietnam Lifestyle Medicine Alliance
Evidence-Based Lifestyle Medicine for Viet Nam.
Contact
contact@vlma.org
Saigon Paragon Building, No. 3 Nguyen Luong Bang Street, Tan My Ward, HCMC
+84 909 228 476
+84 84 9999 911
© 2025 - 2026. Vietnam Lifestyle Medicine Alliance. All rights reserved.
A physician-led professional platform advancing Lifestyle Medicine through education, collaboration, research, and responsible implementation.
VLMA is operated by Vietnam Lifestyle Medicine Alliance Company Limited, Enterprise Registration Number 0318902666.
VLMA is a Sister Organization of the Lifestyle Medicine Global Alliance and a Member Organization of the Planetary Health Alliance.
VLMA is not a medical service provider and does not issue medical licenses or IBLM certification.
